- This topic is empty.
-
Posts
-
The scriptures refer to the demands of justice that are appeased by the atonement. Who or what demands justice? This is a very important issue for me right now. For years, I assumed Heavenly Father demanded justice, but that just doesn’t make sense to me. Why would Heavenly Father demand blood in order to forgive? I recently read what W. Cleon Skousen had to say about it. [EDIT: The talk is
[url=http://www.josephsmithacademy.org/inspira/audio/the-meaning-of-the-atonement/]HERE[/url]
Quote:2 Nephi 9:9; Here is where it says that we would end up with Satan and His angels were there no atonement. It is absolutely beyond the capacity of our Heavenly Father to lift His children who have stumbled, while learning the difference between good and evil, back into His presence because He has to operate according to the law. And all
the other intelligenceswould say, “Father, now they have sinned and come short of thy glory; they cannot come back. Remember all the Laws you told us back then? We didn’t get to be those top people, we were graded down. You remember? You know—laws you said, you kept talking about laws.” These are they who demand justiceand will not let us return. And should God try it, as it says in Alma, they would cease to honor Him and he would CEASE TO BE GOD!! That’s the doctrine. That kind of makes sense. I also think there might be some law of the universe that stands regardless of what any intelligences say.
What do you think?
I had understood this same LDS version of the atonement as it was attributed to Cleon Skousen in a type written, oft photocopied, manuscript from my mission. Essentially it goes that the source of God’s power is his honor. He so perfectly walks the razor wire that all the elements pay him homage. Unfortunately, if he were to forgive those that do not deserve forgiveness it would violate justice and the elements of the universe might revolt against this seeming inconsistency. General chaos would then reign and order would disintegrate. It was therefore necessary that someone that was universally loved and respected would intercede on the behalf of the accused. The universe is moved to compassion and together petition God to rule with mercy. God is then free to forgive the sinner without losing his honor/power.
He used restoration scriptures to support his version.
I now see that this is a Mormonized version of the Satisfaction theory/Governmental thoery.
Quote:The third metaphor, used by the 11th century theologian Anselm, is called the “satisfaction” theory. In this picture mankind owes a debt not to Satan, but to the sovereign God himself. A sovereign may well be able to forgive an insult or an injury in his private capacity, but because he is a sovereign he cannot if the state has been dishonoured. Anselm argued that the insult given to God is so great that only a perfect sacrifice could satisfy, and that Jesus, being both God and man, was this perfect sacrifice. Therefore, the doctrine would be that Jesus gave himself as a “ransom for many”, to God the Father himself.
The next explanation, which was a development by the Reformers of Anselm’s satisfaction theory, is the commonly held Protestant “penal substitution” theory, which, instead of considering sin as an affront to God’s honor, sees sin as the breaking of God’s moral law. Placing a particular emphasis on Romans 6:23 (the wages of sin is death), penal substitution sees sinful man as being subject to God’s wrath with the essence of Jesus’ saving work being his substitution in the sinner’s place, bearing the curse in the place of man (Galatians 3:13). A variation that also falls within this metaphor is Hugo Grotius’ “governmental theory”, which sees Jesus receiving a punishment as a public example of the lengths to which God will go to uphold the moral order.
I also see that – even though Mr. Skousen seems to have cherry picked scriptures to make his position – there are also plenty of LDS scriptures/examples that would support the other theories. Mormonism as a whole does not seem to be able to make up its mind as to how and why the atonement works.
Old-Timer did an AMAZING SS lesson on the various atonement theories that exist here:
http://forum.staylds.com/viewtopic.php?f=9&t=3481&p=72824&hilit=atonement+theories#p71618 Shawn wrote:It is absolutely beyond the capacity of our Heavenly Father to…
Red flag!
I thought Heavenly Father was Omnipotent?
I think He can certainly raise His Children who have stumbled. He chooses not to because He loves His children.
I was in deep despire and amid crisis for my family…He knew he didn’t need to intervene. I could get through it.
So…I believe justice is demanded by the natural causes of the universe, not by a person or god. You can’t sin and someday expect to benefit from it or get away with it. Perhaps the justice is an opportunity cost of failing to gain something in that moment.
In the end, we will stand before God as a sum of all our choices, and that mathematical equation holds us accountable…God is not demanding something…He just does the math.
The Atonement gives Christ the power to be Savior and Father of us all.
Roy, I did a quick study of the satisfaction theory and governmental theory and they both appear to subscribe to the idea that God himself (Heavenly Father) is the one demanding justice and the one who must be satisfied. I could have missed something, though. Heber, I also don’t like Skousen’s remark about it being “beyond the capacity of our Heavenly Father to lift His children who have stumbled….” Maybe he meant Heavenly Father couldn’t do it alonewithout violating laws of the universe. Even then, though, lifting his children is notbeyond his capacity because he is actually lifting us by providing a Savior. Anyway, I’ll overlook that part of Skousen’s talk.
Heber13 wrote:So…I believe justice is demanded by the natural causes of the universe, not by a person or god. You can’t sin and someday expect to benefit from it or get away with it. Perhaps the justice is an opportunity cost of failing to gain something in that moment.
In the end, we will stand before God as a sum of all our choices, and that mathematical equation holds us accountable…God is not demanding something…He just does the math.
I like that. I hope it is true that some natural law demands justice, or that the other intelligences have something to do with it (or both, since they seem compatible). The idea that Heavenly Father is the one demanding justice and that Jesus suffered due to the “wrath of God’ is troubling to me.Why do the scriptures that refer to the demands of justice have to be true? “Demands of justice” sounds like a very human construct to me.
nibbler, the interesting thing is that the scriptures do not exactly specify the source of the demands for justice. If I’m wrong, I’d like to know. Shawn wrote:Roy, I did a quick study of the satisfaction theory and governmental theory and they both appear to subscribe to the idea that God himself (Heavenly Father) is the one demanding justice and the one who must be satisfied. I could have missed something, though.
In a way yes. Notice that in the satisfaction theory God cannot forgive “if the state has been dishonored.” In the governmental theory Jesus receives a punishment as a “public example of the lengths God will go to uphold the moral order.” Who is the state? I believe it to be a collection of citizens that live within boundaries and have common laws. If the state is dishonored then God must act to uphold the state lest he not represent the interests of all the law abiding citizens. If the punishment of Jesus is a “public example” who is the intended public or audience? Again, I believe that the public is all the intelligences that form part of the kingdom.
Suppose someone commits a crime in the USA is sentenced and sent to prison. Who is it that demands justice in this situation. It could be the victim. It could also be society at large with our system of laws – thus the phrase “pay your debt to society”. Even though Pres. Obama is the head of the government and works to uphold and enforce the laws, I do not think that it would be accurate to say that Pres. Obama demands justice. He is not acting for himself but instead acting in his capacity as a public figure to represent the government as a whole.
Of course, I make no promises for how the laws of heaven actually work. I am just trying to explain my understanding of the satisfaction and governmental theories.
That’s some good insight, Roy. Thank you for that post. My Dad tried to explain justice to me using Skousen’s teachings. Dad said the elements and inanimate objects obey Heavenly Father because they respect and love him so much. If God was unjust His then priesthood wouldn’t be respected and he couldn’t command the elements. When I was a teenager – being a stupid teenager – I tried to explain this to an adult non-member friend. I still remember his amusement when he told me “after you take some chemistry and physics classes come back and tell me why the elements behave like they do.”
Roadrunner wrote:I still remember his amusement when he told me “after you take some chemistry and physics classes come back and tell me why the elements behave like they do.”
Bwahaha…Love that response.I have struggled with this. Yes, I know it is a basic Christian belief, and I should just roll with it. But I can’t. If the following are true:
If God is all powerful.
If God can do anything.
Then God can forgive sins without the need for an atonement.
If that is not so ..
If God has rules that He has to abide by, if there are rules to the universe that must be followed, then where do miracles come from? What makes exceptions possible? It isn’t worthiness. It isn’t belief. It isn’t devotion. Miracles are random.
Anyone have a simple answer? Small words. Simple sentences .. For this slow learner.
I like the idea that sin is the rejection of grace. If we don’t try to bend our old idea of sin to this statement but start with that idea: “sin is the rejection of God’s grace” then it makes sense that God cannot lift us out of our “sinful” state (against our will), but his hand is outstretched and waiting for our grasp. Christ said Love is the law, and grace covers any demands of justice. What we need to do is not reject the love and grace offered. It is the prodigal son story. I don’t fully understand the Jewish concept of atonement, but I do understand it is something an individual works out with God and involves repentance (or at least the desire to repent). I’m not sure the Jewish concept of Messiah includes our concept of Him also being a spiritual Savior or Redeemer. And I’m not sure they see justice in quite the same way – even the existence of hell is debatable to Jews. I’m not sure anymore than God is demanding justice. I think we have a deep, deep need for reconciliation, repair and peace that – in our minds – can only come from the mercy of a God.
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.